Implicit Topics

Notice ImplicitTopicsNotUsedAnyMore JanuaryTwelve has now been created and as there is still some interest the next two have been made as well. This is now extended to March 2015, with a gap in 2014.

A WikiTag system that allows topics to be grouped together by time into ImplicitTopics. A new page is created each month, in the form <month><2-digit-year-in-words> (e.g. MayZeroFive or JanuaryEleven). As key discussions develop during that month, they are tagged. The tag should preferably be added at the bottom, above the category tags.

This solves the following problems: Guidelines for what is considered a key topic:

Contributors: GunnarZarncke (.gz), ...

Statistics (number of BackLinks, unfiltered):

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Note: Numbers being filled in to see how it has gone. -- JohnFletcher

Patterns:

For every year october has a comparatively high count. Not that this were statistically significant, but it stand out. Anybody an idea why?

For another approach, yielding somewhat smaller result sets, see WikiCurrentTopics.

Discussions:

Why <month><2-digit-year>? For no better reason, than that was the first, that came to mind. In this way it can be used in a sentence like 'repeated interest in xxx' or 'changes in xxx and earlier'.

I think this is a good idea. My only concern is that some individuals would use it to sign every post they make.

This has not been the case, though there have been a few uses of the tag elsewhere.

Is this tag suited for pages where "important" questions are being asked? Example of mine include asking help for creation of new page called ObjectSerialization, which is mentioned in the WantedPages edit. NewRecentChanges would only show 1 person editing that page, but I thought it was an important request, compared to the 200 other questions I ask in the month :) -- anon 1

I don't think, that posing the question alone makes it topical in this sense. I'd wait until there are some answers. Anyway, marking the page with the tag will not help much in attracting readers, but referencing it on related pages or adding AnswerMe may do so. -- contributor

I find this tag particularly disruptive to the flow of discussion and the organic growth of a page. The datestamping acts like a halting mechanism in that while it dates the page it also necessarily staledates the page. The mechanics of when, where and how to place the tag and when and how to remove or change the tag do not seem to be sufficiently well thought out to make this a universally useful contribution. -- anon 2

How is this 'datestamping' different from adding any other tag (e.g. a category tag)? Or do you consider adding a category disruptive too? Also the tag is not intended to "date" the page in itself, but rather the discussion on it - it indicates its topicality at that date. Maybe its simple form gives the impression of a general datestamp, but that is not its intended use. -- .gz

LanguageAsFoodMetaphor is the type of page that should not be tagged permanently with the temporary tag MonthZeroYear. It staledates a page that would otherwise be timeless with its unsigned comments (some humourous, some insighful) from a broad base of wiki writers. The type of page that encourages both experienced and new contributors from all camps to meet, however briefly, at a common table. After all this is a wiki. -- anon 3

Yes, but ImplicitTopics is not about timestamping a page in the sense of saying this was relevant only then, but about tracking when it was topical. -- .gz

I'm not entirely convinced about ImplicitTopics at all. What purpose is it intended to serve in the long term? It seems like it will be a chronicle of ThingsOnWikisMind in the WikiYesterday... and then what? It seems to me to break the WikiNow, which is one of the things that makes pages here precious (see ArguingWithGhosts). -- EarleMartin

I am rather annoyed by stuff like OctoberZeroFive myself, but since I also created labels like CategoryWikiSavesTheWorld I'd say that as long as the label is useful in the eyes of some participants, it can't be that big a burden on the page. --CostinCozianu

As for WikiNow: What about RecentChanges, WikiCurrentTopics, WikiHistory? The importance may decline from the now into history, but ThoseWhoForgetHistoryAreBoundToRepeatIt? or so. -- .gz

See also WikiNow, TimeStamp.

Related to: GaveUpOnRecentChanges, FilteredRecentChanges (or http:wiki?search=Changes in general)

CategoryWiki

EditText of this page (last edited December 13, 2014) or FindPage with title or text search